Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst - linux - Git at Google

 MDS - Microarchitectural Data Sampling
 ======================================

 Microarchitectural Data Sampling is a hardware vulnerability which allows
 unprivileged speculative access to data which is available in various CPU
 internal buffers.

 Affected processors
 -------------------

 This vulnerability affects a wide range of Intel processors. The
 vulnerability is not present on:

    - Processors from AMD, Centaur and other non Intel vendors

    - Older processor models, where the CPU family is < 6

    - Some Atoms (Bonnell, Saltwell, Goldmont, GoldmontPlus)

    - Intel processors which have the ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO bit set in the
      IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR.

 Whether a processor is affected or not can be read out from the MDS
 vulnerability file in sysfs. See :ref:`mds_sys_info`.

 Not all processors are affected by all variants of MDS, but the mitigation
 is identical for all of them so the kernel treats them as a single
 vulnerability.

 Related CVEs
 ------------

 The following CVE entries are related to the MDS vulnerability:

    ==============  =====  ===================================================
    CVE-2018-12126  MSBDS  Microarchitectural Store Buffer Data Sampling
    CVE-2018-12130  MFBDS  Microarchitectural Fill Buffer Data Sampling
    CVE-2018-12127  MLPDS  Microarchitectural Load Port Data Sampling
    CVE-2019-11091  MDSUM  Microarchitectural Data Sampling Uncacheable Memory
    ==============  =====  ===================================================

 Problem
 -------

 When performing store, load, L1 refill operations, processors write data
 into temporary microarchitectural structures (buffers). The data in the
 buffer can be forwarded to load operations as an optimization.

 Under certain conditions, usually a fault/assist caused by a load
 operation, data unrelated to the load memory address can be speculatively
 forwarded from the buffers. Because the load operation causes a fault or
 assist and its result will be discarded, the forwarded data will not cause
 incorrect program execution or state changes. But a malicious operation
 may be able to forward this speculative data to a disclosure gadget which
 allows in turn to infer the value via a cache side channel attack.

 Because the buffers are potentially shared between Hyper-Threads cross
 Hyper-Thread attacks are possible.

 Deeper technical information is available in the MDS specific x86
 architecture section: :ref:`Documentation/arch/x86/mds.rst <mds>`.


 Attack scenarios
 ----------------

 Attacks against the MDS vulnerabilities can be mounted from malicious non-
 privileged user space applications running on hosts or guest. Malicious
 guest OSes can obviously mount attacks as well.

 Contrary to other speculation based vulnerabilities the MDS vulnerability
 does not allow the attacker to control the memory target address. As a
 consequence the attacks are purely sampling based, but as demonstrated with
 the TLBleed attack samples can be postprocessed successfully.

 Web-Browsers
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^

   It's unclear whether attacks through Web-Browsers are possible at
   all. The exploitation through Java-Script is considered very unlikely,
   but other widely used web technologies like Webassembly could possibly be
   abused.


 .. _mds_sys_info:

 MDS system information
 -----------------------

 The Linux kernel provides a sysfs interface to enumerate the current MDS
 status of the system: whether the system is vulnerable, and which
 mitigations are active. The relevant sysfs file is:

 /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mds

 The possible values in this file are:

   .. list-table::

      * - 'Not affected'
        - The processor is not vulnerable
      * - 'Vulnerable'
        - The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled
      * - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode'
        - The processor is vulnerable but microcode is not updated. The
          mitigation is enabled on a best effort basis.

          If the processor is vulnerable but the availability of the microcode
          based mitigation mechanism is not advertised via CPUID, the kernel
          selects a best effort mitigation mode. This mode invokes the mitigation
          instructions without a guarantee that they clear the CPU buffers.

          This is done to address virtualization scenarios where the host has the
          microcode update applied, but the hypervisor is not yet updated to
          expose the CPUID to the guest. If the host has updated microcode the
          protection takes effect; otherwise a few CPU cycles are wasted
          pointlessly.
      * - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers'
        - The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is
          enabled.

 If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended
 to the above information:

     ========================  ============================================
     'SMT vulnerable'          SMT is enabled
     'SMT mitigated'           SMT is enabled and mitigated
     'SMT disabled'            SMT is disabled
     'SMT Host state unknown'  Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown
     ========================  ============================================

 Mitigation mechanism
 -------------------------

 The kernel detects the affected CPUs and the presence of the microcode
 which is required.

 If a CPU is affected and the microcode is available, then the kernel
 enables the mitigation by default. The mitigation can be controlled at boot
 time via a kernel command line option. See
 :ref:`mds_mitigation_control_command_line`.

 .. _cpu_buffer_clear:

 CPU buffer clearing
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   The mitigation for MDS clears the affected CPU buffers on return to user
   space and when entering a guest.

   If SMT is enabled it also clears the buffers on idle entry when the CPU
   is only affected by MSBDS and not any other MDS variant, because the
   other variants cannot be protected against cross Hyper-Thread attacks.

   For CPUs which are only affected by MSBDS the user space, guest and idle
   transition mitigations are sufficient and SMT is not affected.

 .. _virt_mechanism:

 Virtualization mitigation
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   The protection for host to guest transition depends on the L1TF
   vulnerability of the CPU:

   - CPU is affected by L1TF:

     If the L1D flush mitigation is enabled and up to date microcode is
     available, the L1D flush mitigation is automatically protecting the
     guest transition.

     If the L1D flush mitigation is disabled then the MDS mitigation is
     invoked explicit when the host MDS mitigation is enabled.

     For details on L1TF and virtualization see:
     :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <mitigation_control_kvm>`.

   - CPU is not affected by L1TF:

     CPU buffers are flushed before entering the guest when the host MDS
     mitigation is enabled.

   The resulting MDS protection matrix for the host to guest transition:

   ============ ===== ============= ============ =================
    L1TF         MDS   VMX-L1FLUSH   Host MDS     MDS-State

    Don't care   No    Don't care    N/A          Not affected

    Yes          Yes   Disabled      Off          Vulnerable

    Yes          Yes   Disabled      Full         Mitigated

    Yes          Yes   Enabled       Don't care   Mitigated

    No           Yes   N/A           Off          Vulnerable

    No           Yes   N/A           Full         Mitigated
   ============ ===== ============= ============ =================

   This only covers the host to guest transition, i.e. prevents leakage from
   host to guest, but does not protect the guest internally. Guests need to
   have their own protections.

 .. _xeon_phi:

 XEON PHI specific considerations
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   The XEON PHI processor family is affected by MSBDS which can be exploited
   cross Hyper-Threads when entering idle states. Some XEON PHI variants allow
   to use MWAIT in user space (Ring 3) which opens an potential attack vector
   for malicious user space. The exposure can be disabled on the kernel
   command line with the 'ring3mwait=disable' command line option.

   XEON PHI is not affected by the other MDS variants and MSBDS is mitigated
   before the CPU enters a idle state. As XEON PHI is not affected by L1TF
   either disabling SMT is not required for full protection.

 .. _mds_smt_control:

 SMT control
 ^^^^^^^^^^^

   All MDS variants except MSBDS can be attacked cross Hyper-Threads. That
   means on CPUs which are affected by MFBDS or MLPDS it is necessary to
   disable SMT for full protection. These are most of the affected CPUs; the
   exception is XEON PHI, see :ref:`xeon_phi`.

   Disabling SMT can have a significant performance impact, but the impact
   depends on the type of workloads.

   See the relevant chapter in the L1TF mitigation documentation for details:
   :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst <smt_control>`.


 .. _mds_mitigation_control_command_line:

 Mitigation control on the kernel command line
 ---------------------------------------------

 The kernel command line allows to control the MDS mitigations at boot
 time with the option "mds=". The valid arguments for this option are:

   ============  =============================================================
   full		If the CPU is vulnerable, enable all available mitigations
 		for the MDS vulnerability, CPU buffer clearing on exit to
 		userspace and when entering a VM. Idle transitions are
 		protected as well if SMT is enabled.

 		It does not automatically disable SMT.

   full,nosmt	The same as mds=full, with SMT disabled on vulnerable
 		CPUs.  This is the complete mitigation.

   off		Disables MDS mitigations completely.

   ============  =============================================================

 Not specifying this option is equivalent to "mds=full". For processors
 that are affected by both TAA (TSX Asynchronous Abort) and MDS,
 specifying just "mds=off" without an accompanying "tsx_async_abort=off"
 will have no effect as the same mitigation is used for both
 vulnerabilities.

 Mitigation selection guide
 --------------------------

 1. Trusted userspace
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    If all userspace applications are from a trusted source and do not
    execute untrusted code which is supplied externally, then the mitigation
    can be disabled.


 2. Virtualization with trusted guests
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The same considerations as above versus trusted user space apply.

 3. Virtualization with untrusted guests
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The protection depends on the state of the L1TF mitigations.
    See :ref:`virt_mechanism`.

    If the MDS mitigation is enabled and SMT is disabled, guest to host and
    guest to guest attacks are prevented.

 .. _mds_default_mitigations:

 Default mitigations
 -------------------

   The kernel default mitigations for vulnerable processors are:

   - Enable CPU buffer clearing

   The kernel does not by default enforce the disabling of SMT, which leaves
   SMT systems vulnerable when running untrusted code. The same rationale as
   for L1TF applies.
   See :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <default_mitigations>`.
	MDS - Microarchitectural Data Sampling
	======================================

	Microarchitectural Data Sampling is a hardware vulnerability which allows
	unprivileged speculative access to data which is available in various CPU
	internal buffers.

	Affected processors
	-------------------

	This vulnerability affects a wide range of Intel processors. The
	vulnerability is not present on:

	- Processors from AMD, Centaur and other non Intel vendors

	- Older processor models, where the CPU family is < 6

	- Some Atoms (Bonnell, Saltwell, Goldmont, GoldmontPlus)

	- Intel processors which have the ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO bit set in the
	IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR.

	Whether a processor is affected or not can be read out from the MDS
	vulnerability file in sysfs. See :ref:`mds_sys_info`.

	Not all processors are affected by all variants of MDS, but the mitigation
	is identical for all of them so the kernel treats them as a single
	vulnerability.

	Related CVEs
	------------

	The following CVE entries are related to the MDS vulnerability:

	============== ===== ===================================================
	CVE-2018-12126 MSBDS Microarchitectural Store Buffer Data Sampling
	CVE-2018-12130 MFBDS Microarchitectural Fill Buffer Data Sampling
	CVE-2018-12127 MLPDS Microarchitectural Load Port Data Sampling
	CVE-2019-11091 MDSUM Microarchitectural Data Sampling Uncacheable Memory
	============== ===== ===================================================

	Problem
	-------

	When performing store, load, L1 refill operations, processors write data
	into temporary microarchitectural structures (buffers). The data in the
	buffer can be forwarded to load operations as an optimization.

	Under certain conditions, usually a fault/assist caused by a load
	operation, data unrelated to the load memory address can be speculatively
	forwarded from the buffers. Because the load operation causes a fault or
	assist and its result will be discarded, the forwarded data will not cause
	incorrect program execution or state changes. But a malicious operation
	may be able to forward this speculative data to a disclosure gadget which
	allows in turn to infer the value via a cache side channel attack.

	Because the buffers are potentially shared between Hyper-Threads cross
	Hyper-Thread attacks are possible.

	Deeper technical information is available in the MDS specific x86
	architecture section: :ref:`Documentation/arch/x86/mds.rst <mds>`.


	Attack scenarios
	----------------

	Attacks against the MDS vulnerabilities can be mounted from malicious non-
	privileged user space applications running on hosts or guest. Malicious
	guest OSes can obviously mount attacks as well.

	Contrary to other speculation based vulnerabilities the MDS vulnerability
	does not allow the attacker to control the memory target address. As a
	consequence the attacks are purely sampling based, but as demonstrated with
	the TLBleed attack samples can be postprocessed successfully.

	Web-Browsers
	^^^^^^^^^^^^

	It's unclear whether attacks through Web-Browsers are possible at
	all. The exploitation through Java-Script is considered very unlikely,
	but other widely used web technologies like Webassembly could possibly be
	abused.


	.. _mds_sys_info:

	MDS system information
	-----------------------

	The Linux kernel provides a sysfs interface to enumerate the current MDS
	status of the system: whether the system is vulnerable, and which
	mitigations are active. The relevant sysfs file is:

	/sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mds

	The possible values in this file are:

	.. list-table::

	* - 'Not affected'
	- The processor is not vulnerable
	* - 'Vulnerable'
	- The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled
	* - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode'
	- The processor is vulnerable but microcode is not updated. The
	mitigation is enabled on a best effort basis.

	If the processor is vulnerable but the availability of the microcode
	based mitigation mechanism is not advertised via CPUID, the kernel
	selects a best effort mitigation mode. This mode invokes the mitigation
	instructions without a guarantee that they clear the CPU buffers.

	This is done to address virtualization scenarios where the host has the
	microcode update applied, but the hypervisor is not yet updated to
	expose the CPUID to the guest. If the host has updated microcode the
	protection takes effect; otherwise a few CPU cycles are wasted
	pointlessly.
	* - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers'
	- The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is
	enabled.

	If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended
	to the above information:

	======================== ============================================
	'SMT vulnerable' SMT is enabled
	'SMT mitigated' SMT is enabled and mitigated
	'SMT disabled' SMT is disabled
	'SMT Host state unknown' Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown
	======================== ============================================

	Mitigation mechanism
	-------------------------

	The kernel detects the affected CPUs and the presence of the microcode
	which is required.

	If a CPU is affected and the microcode is available, then the kernel
	enables the mitigation by default. The mitigation can be controlled at boot
	time via a kernel command line option. See
	:ref:`mds_mitigation_control_command_line`.

	.. _cpu_buffer_clear:

	CPU buffer clearing
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	The mitigation for MDS clears the affected CPU buffers on return to user
	space and when entering a guest.

	If SMT is enabled it also clears the buffers on idle entry when the CPU
	is only affected by MSBDS and not any other MDS variant, because the
	other variants cannot be protected against cross Hyper-Thread attacks.

	For CPUs which are only affected by MSBDS the user space, guest and idle
	transition mitigations are sufficient and SMT is not affected.

	.. _virt_mechanism:

	Virtualization mitigation
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	The protection for host to guest transition depends on the L1TF
	vulnerability of the CPU:

	- CPU is affected by L1TF:

	If the L1D flush mitigation is enabled and up to date microcode is
	available, the L1D flush mitigation is automatically protecting the
	guest transition.

	If the L1D flush mitigation is disabled then the MDS mitigation is
	invoked explicit when the host MDS mitigation is enabled.

	For details on L1TF and virtualization see:
	:ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <mitigation_control_kvm>`.

	- CPU is not affected by L1TF:

	CPU buffers are flushed before entering the guest when the host MDS
	mitigation is enabled.

	The resulting MDS protection matrix for the host to guest transition:

	============ ===== ============= ============ =================
	L1TF MDS VMX-L1FLUSH Host MDS MDS-State

	Don't care No Don't care N/A Not affected

	Yes Yes Disabled Off Vulnerable

	Yes Yes Disabled Full Mitigated

	Yes Yes Enabled Don't care Mitigated

	No Yes N/A Off Vulnerable

	No Yes N/A Full Mitigated
	============ ===== ============= ============ =================

	This only covers the host to guest transition, i.e. prevents leakage from
	host to guest, but does not protect the guest internally. Guests need to
	have their own protections.

	.. _xeon_phi:

	XEON PHI specific considerations
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	The XEON PHI processor family is affected by MSBDS which can be exploited
	cross Hyper-Threads when entering idle states. Some XEON PHI variants allow
	to use MWAIT in user space (Ring 3) which opens an potential attack vector
	for malicious user space. The exposure can be disabled on the kernel
	command line with the 'ring3mwait=disable' command line option.

	XEON PHI is not affected by the other MDS variants and MSBDS is mitigated
	before the CPU enters a idle state. As XEON PHI is not affected by L1TF
	either disabling SMT is not required for full protection.

	.. _mds_smt_control:

	SMT control
	^^^^^^^^^^^

	All MDS variants except MSBDS can be attacked cross Hyper-Threads. That
	means on CPUs which are affected by MFBDS or MLPDS it is necessary to
	disable SMT for full protection. These are most of the affected CPUs; the
	exception is XEON PHI, see :ref:`xeon_phi`.

	Disabling SMT can have a significant performance impact, but the impact
	depends on the type of workloads.

	See the relevant chapter in the L1TF mitigation documentation for details:
	:ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst <smt_control>`.


	.. _mds_mitigation_control_command_line:

	Mitigation control on the kernel command line
	---------------------------------------------

	The kernel command line allows to control the MDS mitigations at boot
	time with the option "mds=". The valid arguments for this option are:

	============ =============================================================
	full If the CPU is vulnerable, enable all available mitigations
	for the MDS vulnerability, CPU buffer clearing on exit to
	userspace and when entering a VM. Idle transitions are
	protected as well if SMT is enabled.

	It does not automatically disable SMT.

	full,nosmt The same as mds=full, with SMT disabled on vulnerable
	CPUs. This is the complete mitigation.

	off Disables MDS mitigations completely.

	============ =============================================================

	Not specifying this option is equivalent to "mds=full". For processors
	that are affected by both TAA (TSX Asynchronous Abort) and MDS,
	specifying just "mds=off" without an accompanying "tsx_async_abort=off"
	will have no effect as the same mitigation is used for both
	vulnerabilities.

	Mitigation selection guide
	--------------------------

	1. Trusted userspace
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	If all userspace applications are from a trusted source and do not
	execute untrusted code which is supplied externally, then the mitigation
	can be disabled.


	2. Virtualization with trusted guests
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	The same considerations as above versus trusted user space apply.

	3. Virtualization with untrusted guests
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	The protection depends on the state of the L1TF mitigations.
	See :ref:`virt_mechanism`.

	If the MDS mitigation is enabled and SMT is disabled, guest to host and
	guest to guest attacks are prevented.

	.. _mds_default_mitigations:

	Default mitigations
	-------------------

	The kernel default mitigations for vulnerable processors are:

	- Enable CPU buffer clearing

	The kernel does not by default enforce the disabling of SMT, which leaves
	SMT systems vulnerable when running untrusted code. The same rationale as
	for L1TF applies.
	See :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <default_mitigations>`.